This responds to your inquiry (09-163) in which you ask whether you may
continue to represent family members of police officers employed by a police
department that appears in your court. In particular, you describe a client who is a
mortgage broker and also a local police officer’s step-parent whom you have
represented in the past in various real estate transactions. You also ask whether you
may continue to represent a lender you have represented in the past if a police
officer who may or does appear before you seeks to borrow money from the lender.

Whether you may continue to represent a particular client in your private
practice is a question of professional ethics, not judicial ethics. Therefore, the
Committee assumes that your first question relates to your ethical obligations as a
judge when a police officer employed by a police agency, that also employs a police
officer who is related to your client, appears before you. Similarly, the Committee
assumes that your second question relates to your ethical obligations as a judge when
a police officer representing a police agency, that also employs a police officer who
has applied for a loan from a lender you represent in your private practice, appears
before you.

In either circumstance, it is the Committee’s view that you are not required to
disclose that you represent either client when a police officer who is neither your
client’s relative nor your client’s borrower appears before you. However, depending
on the specific facts presented, disclosure or disqualification may be required when a
police officer, who is your client’s relative or your client’s borrower, will appear in
your court in a case unrelated to your client’s case. Therefore, if you know or if you
inadvertently learn, that the latter circumstance will occur, the Committee suggests
that you write for a formal opinion or seek informal guidance to determine if
disclosure or disqualification is required.